Well Robert- if you've done nothing else with this piece- you've made trans-gender less strange. Thank you.

Humanity wants to see gender as fixed- when in fact it's relatively fluid for many. But the judgment against any form of deviation from "normal" gender and/or sexual orientation roles is still some of the fiercest bigotry going around.

One of the most interesting spiritual principles that exists for any given human being is the idea that one can open an inner channel to the divine when one allows the masculine and feminine to merge within. Speaking form my experience of doing just that- it's worth it.

Now if we can just get EVERYBODY to stop applying gender bias to anybody- we'll all be ahead of the game and I'll get to stop dealing with all the BS around working with textiles and sewing. And won't that be a lovely day!

Considering we are all a mix of male and female, it's really astounding how rife prejudice is when something untoward occurs. For instance, hermaphrodites are not really that seldem. Very often their parents are given the choice of boy or girl and the victim is then "modelled" to meet the choice - which, if the wrong decision has been made, leads to the child becoming a psychological cripple. A horrific scenario. I've had very little conscious experience of the phenomenon of sex-change, and none personally, since I was fortunate enough to be born with my gender already established. But a young woman I once knew was consumed with the desire to become male and did eventually. However, in that instance I was never sure how much of a role a fanatical desire to be like her father played in that decision and whether something radical had happened to prevent her accepting the gender she was born with (female - definitely!).
The English language is kinder to gender than others. German defines male and female all the time, as do many other languages, e.g. in German you aren't just a teacher but a Lehrer or Lehrerin.
My cousin (Ian Puleston-Davies) is currently making a screen play and film about a guy in the North of England who is a dairy farmer and at the same time a cross-dresser who entertains publicly as a (good-looking) woman. It's an intriguing and inspiring story about a human being who happens to have made those particular choices. Here's a link: (copy and paste).
One last thought: Artists are on average tolerant, but the world they live in often fails to come up to scratch!
I don't think that anyone really changes deep down. So it's inevitable that an artist also has deep instincts that are gender-free. But it takes courage to stand up for oneself, and a whole lot more if one falls out of the "normal" framework of conventions.

There once was an artist named Jim
Who wished to be a her not a him
When the job was complete
With the parts in all neat
She found she could paint just like Jim.

Well it seems that George *wanted* to change his gender but was perfectly happy with his successful style(s) of painting. I'm confused as to why you would even note that that part would be "difficult to reprogram?"

We have many professions in English that are gender neutral: artist, doctor, attorney, Senator, engineer, banker, farmer, rancher, pilot, journalist, writer, soldier, chef, builder, etc. .... the words reflect the profession, not the individual in the career path. Some words have had to be replaced, thankfully, such as flight attendant instead of steward or stewardess, Congresswoman instead of the awkward "Congressperson." It can get ridiculous. Some words, such as nurse, reserve gender traits by worn tradition. I still hear "male nurse," as if it needs to be clarified. The word itself is often the problem. Sometimes it really doesn't matter. I was never offended being called "Airman" in the Air Force.
English writers have long struggled with the lack of a proper pronoun: we either have "their," or "he or she," if we wanted to be correct. No one has yet come up with another option that doesn't sound silly and still be grammatically correct.
The only one that really annoys me is, "You _____ like a man." As if being woman enough to perform the task isn't enough .... I have to change genders to change a tire?
Equally, George/Linda is still basically an artist.

Revisiting this page I noticed that my link to the farmer/cross-dresser is not here. If you are interested, type "Justine" and my cousin's name into a search engine and you should get to a relevant website.

Why should it be surprising that Linda's style remained the same? George's gender change was from a desire to be more true to his feelings, not less. A person's artistic style arises from the skills and motivations they have at any given moment in their lives.
The real surprise is that Linda was able to go back to her former town, continue at her ex's gallery and still be successful.

The worst thing about this story is the brazzen violation of the patient-physician privilege by George's doctor. Assuming you have the facts straight, the doctor had no business calling his patient's wife and giving her that information. He should have been disciplined for it.

Grayson Perry - would his work be considered important if he were not what he is?

This was strange. Poor George, and Linda.
I guess what's pretty and worth painting to a person is the same no matter what! The gender of the artist isn't as relavant as you thought, huh.
And Charisse, pleasse! That was a clever summary.

Art is bigger than gender.

Robert Genn, you are indeed wonderful! How tastefully you handle so much of real life, and how much you can teach in a page of your script. Thank you.

Robert, that Dr sounds a bit sus to me..they are not allowed to ring other people no matter who they are and tell them why you have been to them. This is unethical to say the least!!
Good story though.
Australia

It also helps to actually stand before the painting, rather than view a postage stamp sized reproduction. The blue at the periphery of your visual field with the red at the forefront cause a neat shimmering effect that is not available to those who contain the entire work withing a small area of their visual field.

I must admit that I have avoided commenting on this writing. I was enthralled with the story and so bedazzled by the fact that this artist was able to return home to welcoming friends. And then the end of your piece... the obvious point you were wanting to make smacked me in the face and plunged a dagger into my heart and soul.

You have made an assumption that makes your naivete quite apparent.
This human being.. this artist... the soul within had no need to change. Why would that occur?!? Would one change simply because they went to a new city? Perhaps from an isolated existence in Midwest countryside of America to the very heart of a European metropolis? Is this not the same? The change taken by this person was external... to bring the external being into rhythm with the internal reality.

Taking on an outward truth to express what was always within.
Perhaps I miss your true point. Perhaps you are intimating that an artist must grow and develop over time. However, that is not what you wrote.

I truly believe that you missed the facts. We are who we are. No matter our outward appearance. No matter the way we act in different environments and different social groupings. Our inner soul... that which is expressed in our art... is WHO WE ARE.

This artist of whom you wrote is/was no different than all of us.

I have to wonder if a piece of art can be so GOOD or PROFOUND that noone can "get it." I'm afraid that this one left me me rather cold. I remember the V. war--my husband did two tours there.
There is a question of where is the artist coming from with his inner drive to create a "war art" piece. Was this man ever in the war? Every time I approach the subject it's from the gut--I've done one on the Gulf War and a small recent one on the Iraqi War. Both aim at the violence I felt in them.

In my art I can do abstraction as this artist has done, letting colors, shapes, etc. be what conveys my message. But sometimes I wonder if an artist isn't hiding his lack of true understanding of a subject behind his abstraction...

The voice of fire is another example of the artist being a better writer than an artist. I think this is not art. No matter how you glorify it.

I am afraid that the picture of the Voice of Fire cannot possibly do it justice. It is the effect of size, and saturated colour that impacts on the viewer. Colour affects us emotionally, and the large colour field paintings have to be viewed in situ in order to have any appreciation of their impact. Your readers will just have to go to the gallery and experience this wonderful painting themselves. Road trip anyone?

The way I understood the story, the point wasn’t that a person of a different gender should or should not paint differently, but that some people stick with one formula (especially if successful), no matter what. I didn't experience this letter as a commentary about sex change, but as a story about an artist (and a dealer) that found a good market and decided to stay there and keep mining. The gender change part of the story emphasized the strength of their conviction or art for the sales sake - not that there is anything wrong with it. Some have commented that the art stays the same because the artist’s personality or soul didn’t change, just the externals have changed and that doesn’t affect their art. I don't buy that. Many artists change their art dramatically when faced with external changes - going through the war, death of a loved one, new love, after having children, travels...many external experiences alter the artist and he/she moves on with their art. This artist didn't, with a valid reason, and that's the story. Some artists trail their art as they trail their life, and some don't. Interesting, but perhaps I just made up another story.

I've heard from a successful artist that art is communication, and that he doesn't hang his own art in his house because he doesn't like to talk to himself; however, I create beautiful art that I cannot afford to buy, and I love to surround myself with beauty.

ART is bigger than a definition, it encompasses everything from self-expression to advertising. Success, allowing also for the wide spectrum of definitions for this word, can be scientifically, and statistically, shown to be more a function of randomness than talent. Opportunity and persistence have been shown to be of more value to the artist, the military general, or the wealthy CEO, than inherent talent.

Artists, in my opinion, need to read "The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives" by Leonard Mlodinow, among the other books in this genre, to understand why they should simply love what they do, do the best they can, provide as much exposure for their art as they can muster, and be persistent with their production and their marketing. And even with all this and more talent than Michealangelo, you may still feel the sting of indifference by the buying public. If you love what you are producing, and you are doing the best you can, who cares?

When you least expect it, someone comes along that loves your art even as much as you do! Randomness has caused your paths to cross, and you were ready for your opportunity.

I wouldn't worry about trying to explain art; again, it has been scientifically proven that wine ratings cannot be reproduced, even in a single day, with any statistical relevance. And yet, some raters/'critics' of wine make a great deal of money. Just enjoy art, yours and others, and smile when you hear 'explanations' of art. If I was looking at a white canvas with a red smear down the middle, and I liked it, I might buy it, or create my own. I also might find it rather puerile. There is no accounting for taste, correct? On the other hand, if Richard The Lion-Hearted's bloodied hand had stroked the canvas as his last work of art as he fell from a mortal wound, how my evaluation of and interest in the work changes! I submit that Life, and Art, are entirely more complex than we are equipped to understand.